In the comments section of Does the Bible Deal With Sexual Orientation? A black, homosexual, humanist/atheist who delivers the blog AUSFHART (which is the German word for exit) delivered the following commentary:
"The job of the gay community is not to deal with extremists( the black church) who would castigate us or put us on an island and drop an H-bomb on us. The fact of the matter is that there is a small percentage of people in America who understand the true nature of the homosexual community. There is another small percentage who will never understand us ( like Supt. Burnett who believes in a Bible that deems him a descendant of Ham: a slave).
Our job is not to get those people who dislike us to love us. Nor was our aim in the civil rights movement to get prejudiced white people to love us. Our aim was to try to create the kind of America, legislatively, morally, and psychologically, such that even though some whites continued to hate us, they could not openly manifest that hate. That's our job today: to control the extent to which people can publicly manifest anti-gay sentiment.
Therefore, you Negros can pontificate till judgement day, but this Black, gay man will lobby, vote, influence, and agitate for equality. Hey, you hetero Negros cannot make marriage work( marriage rate has plummeted from 70% to 30% currently) so let us Black gays set the example for education achievement, wealth building, family dynamics, child rearing, marriage bliss, love, sex, and overall successful living. You know I'm telling the truth!" ~ February 28, 2010 9:29 AM
Are We At A Loss? What Are We To Say?
I would guess that comments like this would make those cower who really didn't know the truth and chose to live in ignorance. Even children today watching advertisements and the parading of gay individuals, can easily see that gays have an agenda and that agenda is not only for equality, as AUSFHART suggests, but it is about domination, and suppression of anything that doesn't include it, honor it, or make room for it. If it were not for the fact that we've known for a number of years that the gay agenda is what it is, ie: an agenda, I guess we would be caught off guard with sentiments such as these. So in short we are not at a loss for words, neither are we surprised by radical homosexuals such as this. Let's discuss a few aspects of this confusion
The Analysis Of AUSFAHRT's Statements & Assertions
1- Proponents Of The Homosexual Agenda Commonly Promote Religious & Class Discrimination
AUSFAHRT starts off by saying what the "job of the gay community" is not, and then goes on to deliver the biggest "straw-man", "red herring" and down right lie ever told in history. He states that
1- The "black church" is religious extremists (not full of them, we ARE them)
2- That church exists to castigate homosexuals and or drop h-bomb on all of them if possible.
First, I have not read any literature where any church, black or white (by tradition) has said anything close to what AUSFAHRT asserts. What this is called is sensationalism and extremism. The comment has no bearing in truth and is not supported by any evidence whatsoever, but yet he calls the "black church" extremists. Further, the comment is a complete lie designed to stereotype, castigate, humiliate and demonize anyone in the "black church" who stands against homosexuality and in favor of the traditional family (ie: marriage between one man and one woman) as outlined and endorsed in the word of God.
Thus point one of the gay agenda is revealed. Dehumanize, and discriminate against ANYONE who does not agree that homosexuality is an acceptable practice and demonize those who would stand against such practice. In other words, what the proponents of the gay agenda do is not only lie to create a case, but also while clamouring for preferential treatment because of the way they have sex, is stereotype (a technique often found in circles of racism) encouraging class, social, political and racial discrimination. Sentiments such as his may be designed to rally the troops in favor of the gay agenda, but they also speak falsely against the church, and fosters and promotes religious and class discrimination. That is very telling.
2- Proponents Of The Homosexual Agenda, Although Critical Of The Bible, Often Do Not Know The Bible.
In AUSFAHRT's case he's at best a humanist. From his statements, what he has bought into, aside from a wealth of misinformation, is the humanist/atheist agenda against God and his church. He asserts that the curse of Canaan was that he was black and a slave. This is the verse from which he promotes his misinformation:
Genesis 9: 24-27~ "24-And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. 25-And he said, Cursed [be] Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. 26-And he said, Blessed [be] the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. 27-God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant."
What the writer does is engage in eisegesis of the chapter and verses and inserts certain modern myth. He reads into the text a myth that Ham and Canaan were black and that those black folk were slaves. Neither assertion stands or hold weight under examination.
The Canaanites were the inhabitants of Canaan and were displaced by God for their refusal to repent of their sins. They were strong and lived in strong cities:
Numbers 13:28-33 ~ "28-Nevertheless the people [be] strong that dwell in the land, and the cities [are] walled, [and] very great: and moreover we saw the children of Anak there. 29-The Amalekites dwell in the land of the south: and the Hittites, and the Jebusites, and the Amorites, dwell in the mountains: and the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and by the coast of Jordan. 30-And Caleb stilled the people before Moses, and said, Let us go up at once, and possess it; for we are well able to overcome it. 31-But the men that went up with him said, We be not able to go up against the people; for they [are] stronger than we. 32-And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched unto the children of Israel, saying, The land, through which we have gone to search it, [is] a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it [are] men of a great stature. 33-And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, [which come] of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight."
The faithlessness of the people was offset by the faithfulness of Joshua and Caleb:
Numbers 14:6-9 ~ "6-And Joshua the son of Nun, and Caleb the son of Jephunneh, [which were] of them that searched the land, rent their clothes: 7-And they spake unto all the company of the children of Israel, saying, The land, which we passed through to search it, [is] an exceeding good land. 8-If the LORD delight in us, then he will bring us into this land, and give it us; a land which floweth with milk and honey. 9-Only rebel not ye against the LORD, neither fear ye the people of the land; for they [are] bread for us: their defence is departed from them, and the LORD [is] with us: fear them not."
First, the inhabitants of the land dwelt in a good land, and secondly they weren't slaves and third, although one could make the case that they were black, that doesn't necessarily hold true nor is it a requirement of scripture or even hinted at within scripture. In fact their race or skin color bears no significance at all.
Canaan "served" the descendants of Shem in that they were the instruments upon which God displayed his ability to carry out his promise. They were not slaves to Israel on a wholesale scale as hinted to and asserted by extremists.
Amazingly, the only other groups who dogmatically assert notions such as this are racists groups. Either white supremacists, Nazis or black racist groups such as The Nation Of Islam who hold out assertions such as this as some kind of standard against whites and Jews. So the writer misrepresents and promotes biblical illiteracy and does not know biblical history or what the "curse of Canaan" was about. Further he only sensationalizes and creates an argument out of thin air. The fact is that the curse of Canaan had more to do with homosexuality than is traditionally taught, but that is a subject for another post and podcast.
3- Proponents Of The Homosexual Agenda, Often Confuse Teaching Of Biblical Morality And Truth With Hate And Dislike.
AUSFAHRT asserts that their mission is not to get us to 'like" them but to respect them socially and create a moral and legal constraint against teaching against his sexual preference. Once again the assumption is built on at least two faulty premises:
1- Teaching biblical truth and revealing that homosexuality is a violation of God's word and his principles is hatred.
2- That teaching against homosexuality is somehow harmful to greater society.
3- Restrictions of sexual freedom are somehow equal to human rights and racial equality.
Once again, we have a uninformed gay sympathizer who builds on top of his other false assertions and creates additional false assertions.
First, Aside from biblical admonitions against homosexuality, we have outlined countless reasons why homosexuality is harmful and dangerous to society in our post HIV/AIDS & Health Care Reform What Do We Really Know? Homosexual activity is destructive to the physical body in general, not to mention a spiritual bondage. There is no right reason and or research that can solidly claim that homosexual delivers any benefits to society in general, yet alone benefits to those who engage in the practice of homosexual activity.
Secondly, the bible is clear. Not telling the truth is the ultimate form of hatred, especially when there are eternal consequences. If the church were to shut it's mouth and not preach against homosexuality it would be practicing the ultimate in hatred especially knowing that those who practice homosexuality will enter the gates of hell. So to assert that a church that engages the homosexual community encouraging them to leave their sins is somehow hatred is plainly a misrepresentation of scripture and a simple LIE which is commonly promoted today.
Third, if we were to say that homosexuality is acceptable, to be fair, why we we also not fight for the rights of pederasts, bigamists, polygamists and the polyamorous? After all these are groups of people who are sexual minorities too are they not? What gives the homosexual preferential treatment in fighting the battle for sexual equality? I know what it is, it is self-exaltation and perversion of the truth that will not allow the homosexual to view their sexual practices as SIN and against God.
The homosexual wants us to believe that homosexuality is simply a normal diversity. That it is a good practice and as President Obama said, "just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman."
Once again, these assertions are patently FALSE and lies and have no proof and or support. In fact almost every statistic that can be rendered proves that homosexuality is harmful, physically, emotionally and from a spiritual standpoint damning spiritually.
I saved the final observation for this section:
4- Proponents Of The Homosexual Agenda Either Don't Know The Truth Or Crate A Truth To Suit Them.
AUSFAHRT concludes by claiming that justification for homosexuality is heterosexual marital failure and we know he "telling the truth". At least he seems to realize that there is a "truth" and that truth is not necessarily relative to them that review it. In fact if we can know the truth as he asserts, then it is an objective and not relative truth since all can know it. That's at least a good start as most humanists/atheists are reluctant to admit that.
Sadly however, that fact is that he IS NOT telling the truth. Heterosexual marriages certainly distressed is no reason to promote homosexuality. This actually has nothing to do with homosexuality. Secondly, he is being disingenuous and untruthful in his representations and has turned his eye to the actual research and biblical insights that overturn each of his statements. Further he has misrepresented the bible and the biblical narrative regarding slavery and associated that with being black or a "Negro" as he says.
So we say "AUSFAHRT!" to AUSFAHRT. Homosexual propaganda IS NOT the best argument to use on a Christian blog especially with informed readers such as we are. Neither are misrepresentations of the bible the best argument against the bible...however, unlike Nazi Germany, this is a FREE country, and you are entitled to your own opinion. You can come to your own conclusions on matters and there's no love lost. However, please don't expect us follow you to the hell that you are proudly forging your path towards.